The past few hours in Tripoli have been noisy with the sounds of gunfire. Up until now, Gaddafi had lost most of the country but still maintained control in the capital and his hometown of Sirte. Libyan TV has been broadcasting that a number of cities were retaken by Gaddafi’s forces today, but other news outlets have shown those claims to be fiction. Zawiyah, west of Tripoli, was still being held by anti-regime protesters despite several very violent attacks.
Libyan TV is also claiming that the gunfire is the result of pro-Gaddafi folks celebrating, and the Al Jazeera correspondent on the ground concurred that it’s coming partially from regime supporters who actually believe that government forces have re-taken opposition-held cities and are marching on Benghazi. But she also reports that there’s more going on than just the celebrations, and it’s possible that there are some actual gunbattles in the city between pro- and anti-Gaddafi forces.
Everything points to the fact that the noose is still tightening against Gaddafi and his supporters. It would be fitting to see his insane rule end as his supporters celebrate victory in the parallel universe they’ve constructed for themselves. Al Jazeera has a good live blog of Sunday’s events. And their English live feed is here.
Thanks for the link.
Looks like Gaddafi’s days are numbered.
It’s obvious Gaddafi will fall; the only question is how many more lives will be lost in the process. It’s irresponsible for western governments to sit on the sidelines while this slaughter goes on. NATO can shorten this civil war and save lives by taking out Gaddafi’s air force, tanks, and concentrations of mercenary troops — as we did in Kosovo. The time to do that is now.
Meanwhile, in Turkey — in the finest tradition of repressive governments everywhere — journalists have been arrested for plotting to overthrow the government.
Well, yeah, that’s what publishing the truth about corrupt repressive regimes has a tendency to do. Unrest on the African continent must be making the thugs in Ankara nervous.
It must be making the thugs in Washington, D.C., nervous, too — they’ve now charged WikiLeaks leaker Bradley Manning with capital crimes; although, in a show of magnanamity, the U.S. Army says it won’t seek to put Manning to death. They only want to lock him away in Supermax until he’s 100 years old.
And, in a 21st-century twist on the GOP’s HUAC mentality, a GOP congressman is abusing his party’s new House majority by scheduling hearings on Muslims’ role in homegrown terrorism.
Last time I checked, Timothy McVeigh was a white supremacist, and none of the people blowing up abortion clinics wore turbans or head scarves. So, if Rep. King really wants to “out” our homegrown terrorists, he should start by taking a long hard look at his fellow rightwingers.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41.....news-life/
@2
Roger, my inclination is that as long as the momentum stays on the side of anti-Gaddafi forces, we should stay on the sidelines. If pro-Gaddafi forces threaten some opposition-controlled cities that can’t defend themselves, we might need to step in to prevent a more large scale massacre, but it’s the best outcome for us if the Libyans win this battle on their own.
@5 You do realize that approach will cost more — perhaps many more — Libyan lives, don’t you? How much is a life worth?
Yes, I understand the political implications of “helping” the Libyan rebels. But I’m not talking about sending in ground troops or occupying the country. I’m only suggesting airstrikes against Gaddafi’s heavy weaponry — jets, helicopters, tanks, and artillery. So he can’t use that equipment to kill his people. That’s all I’m arguing for.
@6
A certain amount of outside help could benefit, but it’s not a matter of fact that intervening from afar would save lives in the long run. It’s possible it might not, or it might even escalate the conflict. If the entire int’l community were united in a particular course, you could more easily claim that.
The role for the US is to stay out of Libyan affairs. It’s up to the Libyans to determine who will be in their government and how that government operates, be it Western-style democracy or some Islamic theocracy. It’s their business, no ours!
So far, Obama has done just fine is staying the hell out of it. All he has to do is do nothing.
@7 That’s a tactical judgment that would have to be made by our military commanders, but you and I both know both know that intervention is a political decision made by political leaders on political considerations that may have little or nothing to do with saving lives. I am arguing for putting morality ahead of political expediency in this case.
@8 I agree with staying out of Libyan affairs. U.S. interference in Libyan self-determination would just turn the Libyan people (and the rest of the Arab world) against us — it would be seen as “meddling as usual” by the USA. What I’m arguing for is different — to keep Gaddafi from slaughtering Libyans by destroying his heavy military hardware. The world should not stand by idly when a dictator of his ilk attacks unarmed protesters with jets, helicopter gunships, tanks, and artillery. That’s immoral.
If you want to hear Michael Moore’s speech to the Wisconsin anti-Walker protesters, this link will take you there. Note, the video is almost 1/2 hour long.
http://handbill.us/?p=3888
We have a history, a brutally ugly history, of hijacking other nations’ revolutions. Everything generally goes south for democracy, and for us, after that. We need to monitor, provide humanitarian assistance if necessary, but, otherwise we need to stay the hell out unless as part of an international effort that has broad support within Libya. I agree with PI on this one. I think the Obama Administration has done a helluva job so far with regard to letting Middle East events play out on their own terms. I just wish we’d do that sometimes in places like Latin America.
@9
I am arguing for putting morality ahead of political expediency in this case.
I’m looking purely at pragmatism (not political expediency). I want the approach that ensures that 1) Libya moves past the Gaddafi regime towards a democracy, 2) A few lives as possible are lost now and into the future, and 3) Our role doesn’t create unnecessary conflicts. Not an easy question and I don’t think we know even now what approach satisfies each of those objectives most effectively.